[Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] For review - updated templates Cat B, questions 1 and 2

Tue Mar 4 13:49:05 UTC 2014

+1 to Kathy
I recall seeing multiple studies stating exactly the same thing
If you respect privacy then people will provide better quality data
It's logical and obvious

--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting & Colocation, Domains
http://www.blacknight.co/
http://blog.blacknight.com/
http://www.technology.ie
Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
Locall: 1850 929 929
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763
Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland  Company No.: 370845

From: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Kathy Kleiman
Sent: Tuesday, March 4, 2014 1:46 PM
To: Marika Konings; gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] For review - updated templates Cat B, questions 1 and 2

Marika, Tx you for checking with Lesley! But the results of that study were shared with the Whois Review Team, so the idea that "it is doubtful if these claims could be independently audited or verified" is not true.  It has been checked - in this field and many others. People have less incentive to mislead when they know their interests (including privacy) are protected.

I'm happy to work with you on finding additional studies, and summaries of studies, but the opinion in the paper does need to be updated or removed.

Tx,
Kathy
  :
Kathy, on the Nominet study, please note the information in the updated template for Cat B question 2 that was circulated last week. (see attached). I reached out to Lesley Cowley last week and she informed me that unfortunately the study is not publicly available. However, should there be any specific questions in relation to the data on opt-out, she would be do her best to try and assist.

Best regards,

Marika

From: Kathy Kleiman <kathy at kathykleiman.com<mailto:kathy at kathykleiman.com>>
Date: Tuesday 4 March 2014 14:23
To: "gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org>" <gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] For review - updated templates Cat B, questions 1 and 2

What Volker writes below makes sense to me, All.  Provided the agreed upon 2013 RAA review of data has been done by someone, I don't see why we should duplicate it. The scope of our WG is p/p providers affiliated with registrars -- so coordination of the review of the data, per the ICANN rules, in conjunction with the Registrar makes perfect sense to me.

As does a "no-privacy penalty." What we have found (Nominet and others -- BTW no one on staff reached out to me to help dig out this study, can we do that this week?) is that when people know their data is private and protected, it is more accurate.  That makes sense and complies with government advice from all corners. Even the US Federal Trade Commission says not to give out your name and phone number in a way that is open and unprotected!

So I think we are already headed towards more accurate data...
Best,
Kathy
:
Hi Steven,

if we can limit that obligation to those cases where no validation of the underlying data has been performed by the registrar of record, we might be getting somewhere. An independent obligation that duplicates work already done will help no one and confuse many.

Volker

Am 03.03.2014 19:51, schrieb Metalitz, Steven:
Thanks Volker.  It is precisely because "the registrars obligation only extends to the registrant of record, not to anyone who may use the domain name with permission of that registrant," that there should be an independent obligation on the part of the p/p service provider to validate its customer's contact information.

Steve.

From: Volker Greimann [mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net]
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2014 5:32 AM
To: Metalitz, Steven; gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] For review - updated templates Cat B, questions 1 and 2

Hi Steven,

Even when this assertion is relevant, it may not be persuasive, for a number of reasons.  For example, the Whois data reminder obligation applies to the registrant of record.  In the case of a proxy service, the registrant or record is the service, not its customer.  If a Whois data reminder is sent to a non-proxy registrant and bounces back, then the RAA requires the registrar to re-verify.  But a data reminder sent to a proxy service will almost never bounce back, and therefore there may be no RAA obligation to re-verify.   This is so even if the customer data provided to the service is inaccurate or outdated.   In this circumstance it is up to the p/p service accreditation standards to specify the conditions under which customer data must be re-verified.

This depends on how the service is set up. One could suggest that if such required messages from the registrar do not reach the registrant, it could become the providers' obligation to perform the information requirements on its own. The registrar could then rely on the provider to perform its duties under the accreditation agreement with ICANN just at it performs its own obligations under the RAA.

Please also remember that the registrars obligation only extends to the registrant of record, not to anyone who may use the domain name with permission of that registrant.

V.

--

Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen,

Volker A. Greimann

- Rechtsabteilung -

Key-Systems GmbH

Im Oberen Werk 1

66386 St. Ingbert

Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901

Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851

Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>

Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net>www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com>

Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:

www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>

Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin

Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken

Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534

Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP

www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu>

Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.

--------------------------------------------

Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Best regards,

Volker A. Greimann

- legal department -

Key-Systems GmbH

Im Oberen Werk 1

66386 St. Ingbert

Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901

Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851

Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>

Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net>www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com>

Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:

www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>

CEO: Alexander Siffrin

Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken

V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534

Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP

www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu>

This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.

_______________________________________________

Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list

Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/attachments/20140304/3c67fdd1/attachment-0001.html>